Just after the co-chairmen of President Barack Obama’s high-profile deficit commission offered a revised plan for reducing the deficit in an attempt to attract a majority of support from the 18-member panel, it appeared Wednesday that the proposal will fall short of a consensus intended to force a vote in Congress.

At least six members of the deficit commission are planning to oppose the final agreement, according to sources and the members’ public statements. That puts it at least two votes short of the 14-vote majority that President Barack Obama set as a goal when he created the bipartisan body in February.

The proposals by Erskine Bowles and Alan Simpson, outlined in a report called “The Moment of Truth,” are roughly the same as the one they offered Nov. 10, which contained politically hard-to-swallow deficit remedies such as reduced federal entitlement benefits, a hike in the retirement age and elimination of popular tax exemptions. After their preliminary report drew criticism from both sides of the political divide, Bowles and Simpson went back to the drawing board, but their alterations reflect the difficulty of drafting a plan that Republicans and Democrats could both support.

The plan would still reduce projected budget deficits by $3.8 trillion through 2020. The deficit would fall to 2.3 percent of gross domestic product in 2015, slightly more than the 2.2 percent estimate in the Nov. 10 report. The Social Security reform plan remains the same — gradual increases in the retirement age to receive full benefits, along with a higher cap on taxable income, which would raise taxes. The system would remain solvent until at least 2085.

The plan retains a proposed 15 cent a gallon increase in the federal gasoline tax, a three year freeze of pay raises for federal workers and a cut in the federal workforce of 200,000 through attrition.

At least seven commission members, including Senators Judd Gregg (R-N.H.) and Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), said they would vote for the revised plan, according to Co-chairman Erskine Bowles, but that still left it seven votes short of the 14-vote threshold. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has promised to put the package to a vote if it met that standard, but incoming House Speaker John Boehner has made no such promise.

At the same time, commission members Andy Stern, the former Service Employees International Union chief, and Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), are against the proposal, and have vowed to pursue their own deficit reduction plans, which include smaller spending cuts and higher taxes than the commission draft.

Representatives Paul Ryan (R-Ohio), and Jeb Hensarling, (R-Texas), oppose the Simpson-Bowles plans call for tax increases, and claim that the commission’s approach to health care would effectively further the Obama health care reform, which Republicans have vowed to repeal. Ryan and Hensarling said they would push Ryan’s own fiscal “road map” plan to budget reform.

Meanwhile, a fair reading of comments by Rep. Xavier Becerra (D-Calif.), Tuesday indicated he would vote no on the Bowles-Simpson plan: he portrayed its proposed Social Security reforms as a betrayal of hard-working Americans like his father, a manual laborer who never earned more than $22,000 a year would face benefit cuts.

Also, a commission source said the Rep. Dave Camp (R-Mich.), the incoming chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, was opposed to the Bowles-Simpson tax reform plan. Camp said he wants to oversee any changes to the code as head of the tax writing committee.

Under their original charge from Obama, the commission was given until Dec. 1 to come up with their recommendations. But Bowles and Simpson announced Tuesday that they had postponed the commission’s final vote on a plan until Friday.